Intuition or Proof: The Social Science Justification for the Diversity Rationale in Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger

49 Pages Posted: 24 Oct 2010

See all articles by Justin R. Pidot

Justin R. Pidot

University of Denver Sturm College of Law

Date Written: 2006

Abstract

The diversity rationale accepted by the Supreme Court as a justification for affirmative action programs rests, in part, on the empirical claim that racial diversity enhances education. This article considers the social science presented in the Michigan affirmative action cases and suggests that it may not conclusively demonstrate that increasing numeric racial diversity leads to improved education. Nonetheless, the United States Supreme Court appears to have found that as a matter of fact diversity enhances education. This Article questions the propriety of such appellate fact finding and suggests that the Supreme Court's approach improperly resulted in the constitutionalization of a debated factual issue.

Keywords: Constitutional Law, Equal Protection Clause, Affirmative Action

Suggested Citation

Pidot, Justin R., Intuition or Proof: The Social Science Justification for the Diversity Rationale in Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger (2006). Stanford Law Review, Vol. 59, No. 3, 2006. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1695705

Justin R. Pidot (Contact Author)

University of Denver Sturm College of Law ( email )

2255 E. Evans Avenue
Denver, CO 80208
United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
53
Abstract Views
549
rank
376,435
PlumX Metrics